A Support Dividing Itself


After a fine victory over Brechin
Rovers (detailed in my previous entry) plus the hilarity of an ‘AskNaismith’
hashtag on Twitter which was entirely hijacked by Rangers fans slating their
former hero, one could have been forgiven for thinking the mood among fans had
lifted considerably following a horrendous 8 days.
With an excellent 4-1 result
inspired by Nicky Law on Saturday plus aforementioned amusement of said
ill-conceived Q&A with the Toffees’ ‘finest’, it seemed like a certain
level of ‘normality’ had tentatively returned and fans could finally get on
with the important business of supporting the team on the pitch.
Unfortunately it seems a sizeable
chunk of fans have resumed perpetuating the divide which is now becoming real,
despite the fact it is based on hot air. It has grown from ‘Walter Smith V
Charles Green’ to quite simply ‘Rangers V Charles Green’.
With anti-Green chants quite
audible at Ibrox, it seems a proportion of fans have decided, regardless of
what facts they are presented with, that Charles Green is now Rangers’ nemesis
and must be booted out of the club at all costs. The myth of Green’s
malevolence is growing by the day, and after he led a consortium which saved
this club from dribbling out of existence, somehow he has been demoted to some
kind of fiendish crook intent on destroying Rangers at all costs.
Quite honestly this anti-Green
tirade is now utterly tiresome. Before I go on, as I have said before I am not
‘pro-Green’. Indeed, my fellow bear Locutus59’s entry here summed it up quite
well; no one involved with the current running of the club or projected
takeovers comes out smelling anything like roses. Charles Green, Craig Mather,
Walter Smith, Brian Stockbridge, Jim McColl and Paul Murray have each behaved
poorly to varying degrees.
For some reason, however, Charles
Green has been picked as the ultimate ‘baddie’ despite the fact he has carried
out no sinister act upon Rangers fans or their club whatsoever. Yes, he has
been guilty of a big mouth and bluster, and can be guilty of playing to the
galleries. We know this. That said, no one can tangibly name a single genuinely
malevolent act he has carried out on this club. He has not broken the law, he
has not stolen from the club, and his regime in general has done relatively well
under quite appalling circumstances to keep the club afloat.
A breakdown of the cash used
during the time from the IPO onwards reveals the following:
Now, call me absolutely crazy but
is that not the day-to-day running of a club the size of Rangers? Some fans
appear aghast at the costs here and are crying foul murder but it strikes me
they are oblivious to how much it costs to run, maintain and fund a club the
size of Rangers. I warned prior to the third division that the reduction of
income Rangers would suffer in that league would hit hard. Now supporters are
disgusted at ‘how much we are spending’. The problem is an institute Rangers’
size cannot spend less. The only way to reduce the overheads is by lowering the
ambitions on the players Rangers sign. And sadly, realistically, Rangers
supporters will not generally tolerate a bunch of small-time signings (with all
due respect to them) from an SFL side.
In order to keep the supporters
of Rangers FC happy the club had to sign players of a quality we cannot
actually afford. Green’s comments about how he would not have signed these
players if he was in charge is half realism and half false. Realistically he is
spot on – we cannot afford them. But logically Rangers supporters, whether we
like it or not, want shiny signings and not underwhelming ones.
So looking at the rest of the
costs they seem completely acceptable for a club of this size.
And yet, some fans want to use
the fact £22M has been spent as ammo against the regime and Charles Green in
particular. Bar the players/wages, what costs there can realistically be
reduced and keep the club running to the level the fans expect?
I include myself in the
complaints over the RTV service at times – we want it running impeccably and
with no gremlins. Problem is that level of smoothness costs. Clubs in lower
divisions do not have their own TV station. We do. Because we are Rangers. We
cost more. It really is that simple.
I will not lie and say the club
is running impeccably; it is not. But it strikes me if it was as bad as some
fans believe and Green was the monster he is being portrayed as then he would
have taken the club to the cleaners’ long ago and the regime would have led to
the demise of Rangers. Well over a year after Green’s consortium invested, and
we are still here.
The major issues with our
finances come simply from no CL cash, no SPL prize money (it never was given
was it), vastly reduced TV cash due to the new deal the SPFL created at the
start of last season, and generally reduced income – we charge less for season
tickets now. And yet our costs, bar player transfer fees and to an extent
wages, have not actually reduced in conjunction with this. Of course they have
But, let us just blame Charles
Green and his consortium until they quit, new men take over, and we start
blaming them for our problems instead.
(They’ll just blame their
predecessors you know)


  1. You make some good point and are honest that the club can not afford to pay the players it has signed.

    So my question is this: are we not running the risk of repeating the errors that led to our demise in the first place?

  2. Firstly, I'm personally not sure where you got the details on that board that tells us how the £22m has actually been spent – to give any creedence whatsoever to those figures you should state your source?!
    Secondly, where does two years of season book money fit into those figures if 'general running costs' and 'players and staff wages'are included in the £22m?! That's not what the IPO cash was for!!
    Thirdly – no mention of what are allegedly large salaries for directors along with bonuses for Green and Ahmad for heroically winning SFL3?!!


    • The source was none other than Brian Stockbridge in the Scottish sun did a 2 piece spread you know telling us how we aren't in financial difficulties nor heading that way and some months we don't make a loss like is being reported.pinch of salt a deep breath and carry on supporting our team!

  3. Charles Green never saved Rangers, Rangers where liquidated when the club failed to agree a CVA with Her Majesty's taxing authorities. Charles Green, Terry Butcher, and your very own director of communications Mr Traynor all consider Rangers dead -the new club are trying to live off the reputation of Rangers 1872-2012,, It doesn't matter how you cut it up, Charles Green bought only bought the assets of the club, you cannot buy something which has legally been liquidated, at best Rangers International are a tribute to the dead club but certainly are in no way that club, Its an impossibility, Im not being 'anti Rangers'because for all intents and purposes when you consider as McCoist said previously,you play at ibrox in blue with the same fans-thats true but as a legal entity Rangers are no more, the club that won 9 in a row are not the same club who won the Scottish third division-Thats a fact you can take to the bank.

    • 140 years and still going strong. A world record 54 national championships and without doubt many more to come in the future. Scotlands most succesfull football club. Now there's some facts you can take to the bank.

    • There you go you just admitted Your not Anti Rangers !!! so why comment on something that in your opinion doesn't exist ?? lol

  4. Charles Greens big mouth could have or could cost the club investment from companies and individuals who do not want their reputation tarnished. Silly outbursts and daft remarks ie "my paki friend" do not sit well. Greens issue amongst Rangers fans is that what he says is hard to believe now. Is he telling the truth? Is he lying?…… The little boy who cried "wolf" springs to mind. Green may have invested other peoples money to restore the club, but he is an unsettling influence that either needs to pipe down and do his job – or move on. Less jaw work – more paw work.

    • If you want to know anything about Rangers then ask a tim. Although your information may be a bit childish

  5. Sorry I don't care! What I saw on the park was a much better team than last season. Against Brechin we bossed the game and forced them to score what has to be admitted , a fantastic goal. The desire to push forward and create was sadly missing for a large part of last season. I don't care how much Nicky Law cost I for one will enjoy watching him , not since wee Naisy left have I enjoyed a Rangers players' attitude to the game and work rate so much. I grow tired of watching the 'safe ball' always being played , take a chance and 'have a go son' I'm glad it's back. Long may it stay.

  6. As others have said, there is no verification of any of the spent numbers above, but also as the second comment notes, there is no accounting for 2 sets of season ticket sales, which must be approximately £20 Million. Add to that the non season tickets sales, an average of over 10,000 a game last season, catering etc, advertising which although severely diminished still exists, programme sales and you have an easy £25 Million. If there is £10M in the bank, that would be £15 in someone's pocket. Whose?

  7. The costs came from Sun interview with Stockbridge who has perhaps put his camera phone away for a wee while. If you analyse the costs £2.6 million are in the purchase of hopefully good assets. The car park and Edminston House so well done Charles et al. Other costs will never be incurred again – legal fees for Pinsent and Whyte battles.

    Charles hasn't once stated how much he, Ahmad and Stockbridge have taken out of the club but certainly non-playing staff 'salaries' and bonuses are unacceptable for where we are.

    Charles also I'm afraid is now largely untrustworthy in that he keeps contradicting himself, now on numerous occasions. It's great that he shafted Whyte, and he has done some very good things, however the single biggest issue is transparency. Let's ensure no-one ever again shafts RFC.

    It's dead simple – we need to know and see what is going on.

  8. You can't be both saviour and defender of the club and willing to walk away just as long as someone slips you £14m. It's the nakedly avaricious nature of his cash demands – cash which any new owner ought to be looking to invest in the club – which has led to his fall from favour ánd which makes the supporter anger entirely justifiable.

    ndy pdk

  9. Head firmly in the sand as usual.

    Ahmad suing for 3.4m and Zeus people are still the well meaning men running the club? No. They are leeching every penny they can from the club. 100% executive bonuses for a loss making business because we won Div 3? Do you deem this acceptable?

  10. As usual there is the omnipresent tim presenting wishful thinking as fact. Here's a fact you can take to the bank…. All the people and organisations that matter consider Rangers the same club. Your (wishful thinking) opinion is only that; opinion.
    I can feel your pain in every sentence.


  11. Time will reveal all.

    UEFA,SFA and the Courts recognise that Rangers Football Club formed in 1872 still exists. The Corporate body that operated the club went into receivership in 2012.

    A new custodian for the football club was sought and Charles Green stepped up.

    It may stick in the throat of many that the football club did not die in 2012, what is the motive for attempting to prove this was not the case, answers on a postcard please.

    Fans of other clubs should stick to suporting their clubs instead of the petty arguements of Sevco FC, Newco etc.

    I want to continue supporting my club no matter where they play, the corporate lads in the background shouild not be washing their or the clubs dirty washing in public its a buisiness FFS.

Comments are closed.